If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Yea I'm tracking man. Just pointing out the whole #1 Team and AP Poll non-sense.

I (DO) think Neb. was the best team that year and had they played Mich. would likely have beat them.

I also think the AP Poll is the REASON College Football was broken.
It has NOT stood the test of time which is why better systems have been created.

Since when do we trust the MEDIA(AP Poll)? Their bias can bee seen throughout the years. Splitting National Titles based off of pure bias.

The same algorithm that the BCS used in 2003 would have kept Alabama out of the title game in 2011. That same system let the #2 and #3 teams in every poll play each other for a mock championship in 2003. In a broken system a glass globe for a trophy makes a lot of sense.

John, you give 1 incident, out of 16 Games..... How many Split Titles did the AP Cause?

Plus the whole PRE-SEASON Rank is bullcrap too.
You could essentially always make certain teams start at the bottom.

The BCS(System) with a Play-off System would be MONEY! The AP can take it to the house.

I think you and I are on the same page as far as a real 16 team playoff system being the only way to approach a true National champion, everything else is deeply flawed and leads to endless debate. My problem is that debate used to be fun, arguing obscure points forever trying to make a case for why you believe your team is the true Champion. Now the BCS gives a false sense of legitimacy to their team, stifling that debate. Arbitrarily naming the two teams that get to play for the championship is just as bad as outright naming the champion.

The same algorithm that the BCS used in 2003 would have kept Alabama out of the title game in 2011. That same system let the #2 and #3 teams in every poll play each other for a mock championship in 2003. In a broken system a glass globe for a trophy makes a lot of sense.

You're still only talking about 1 game out of 16 and even that game is up for debate.
The AP Poll is not part of the system. They hate that.

Originally Posted by John Robinson

Now the BCS gives a false sense of legitimacy to their team,

Really? I just don't think that's fair to the National Championship Games of this era. There have been some great games of the best teams from all the Major Conferences. I'd like to see someone tell them that their title isn't really worthy b/c you really don't deserve it. You didn't really win it all.

Would it have been better to have 2 or 3 or 4 undefeated teams not play each other like the AP? and just all split the Title? C'MON MAN!

BESIDES 2003. Which games were played in which the winner could not be seen as the best in the country?

You're still only talking about 1 game out of 16 and even that game is up for debate.
The AP Poll is not part of the system. They hate that.

Would it have been better to have 2 or 3 or 4 undefeated teams not play each other like the AP?
and just all split the Title?

BESIDES 2003. Which games were played in which the winner could not be seen as the best in the country?

Yes it would have been better. That's what I've been saying since they started the whole BSC bullcrap. Like I said, better to argue about it when we all knew the system was flawed, that was fun. I think I've made my point, I can handle it if you don't agree. There is no right or wrong here, its still just an arbitrary title, only now a computer is part of the decision. The four team playoff system will be slightly better, but not near as good as a true 16 team system would be.

I would say 13-0 is getting it done on the field of play, and it was the reason the BCS abandoned their algorithm after that year and started over again. LSU finishing #2 that season is nothing to be ashamed of.

13 - 0? USC was beaten by Cal that season. I had to look it up but I know they were beaten by a very average team. Whereas the eventual Nat'l Champions lost to a top ranked Florida team. LSU should have played USC instead of Oklahoma. It was what the fans wanted too. They were nothing more than an Oregon of today. One decent team playing in a weak Conference.

Collecting more taxes than is absolutely necessary is legalized robbery. Calvin Coolidge

13 - 0? USC was beaten by Cal that season. I had to look it up but I know they were beaten by a very average team. Whereas the eventual Nat'l Champions lost to a top ranked Florida team. LSU should have played USC instead of Oklahoma. It was what the fans wanted too. They were nothing more than an Oregon of today. One decent team playing in a weak Conference.

USC was notorious for laying an egg against a lessor team at some point during the season back then, seems like they did it every year. In pro football this is no big deal as you get to prove yourself in the post season, in college football it's the kiss of death. That said Cal was a legit team that year and USC lost in triple overtime. My biggest problem with you is your putting down any other conference but the SEC as weak. I'll bet on any given Saturday a number of Pac 10-12 teams could hold their own against a number of SEC teams. I know LSU and some others have beaten some Pac 10 teams in the past, but Pac 10 teams have beaten SEC teams too. Our middle of the pack teams are still pretty good and play good football, the fact they tend to beat each other up shouldn't diminish their stature.

marvin,
i almost picked the northwest/west coast circuit for my hypothetical analogy! evidence that you just can't make everyone happy even when you just make stuff up not even about football!

I consider myself fortunate that if I get the bug to spend a lot of money being frustrated again I'm on speaking terms with several good trainers including 3 within a days easy drive that have taken dogs with themselves or their owners to the prize many aspire to .

Originally Posted by Denver

The Big 10 may not be in the same league as far as college football as the SEC. But it is the premiere league as far as Dogs and Trainers!

Like the SEC folks you over-rate when you type premier - but you do have a lot of guys in close proximity that know how to get the job done, as your area always has. & a lot of old money that enables them.

USC was notorious for laying an egg against a lessor team at some point during the season back then, seems like they did it every year. In pro football this is no big deal as you get to prove yourself in the post season, in college football it's the kiss of death. That said Cal was a legit team that year and USC lost in triple overtime. My biggest problem with you is your putting down any other conference but the SEC as weak. I'll bet on any given Saturday a number of Pac 10-12 teams could hold their own against a number of SEC teams. I know LSU and some others have beaten some Pac 10 teams in the past, but Pac 10 teams have beaten SEC teams too. Our middle of the pack teams are still pretty good and play good football, the fact they tend to beat each other up shouldn't diminish their stature.

I'm not trying to be mean to the other Conferences but, it's the damn truth! Look at the last 15 years! Pac 10 has won it twice, both times with USC. Big 10 won it once, Ohio St. Big 12(your Grand Daddy's teams since that is what they call it when the play one another), twice with Texas and Oklahoma. ACC, twice with Florida St and Miami. SEC, nine times with five different teams; LSU, Bama, Auburn, Florida & Tennessee. The BCS is the system the U's sign on with and next season, it will get settled on the field. The only folks that will be complaining are the ones ranked behind the teams playing.

The SEC is not the center of the College Football Universe. The SEC has just taken College Football to a higher level.

Last edited by Franco; 11-13-2013 at 07:50 PM.

Collecting more taxes than is absolutely necessary is legalized robbery. Calvin Coolidge

USC was notorious for laying an egg against a lessor team at some point during the season back then, seems like they did it every year. In pro football this is no big deal as you get to prove yourself in the post season, in college football it's the kiss of death. That said Cal was a legit team that year and USC lost in triple overtime.

It sounds like you guys have some blinding love to whoever you're supporting.
We've got mgundog saying USC was 13-0 and now you're saying Cal was a legit team that year?
Cal was 7/6 that year Bro-Ham!